[THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS FROM "THE NEW DAWN", VOL. 1, NO. 1, MAY 1991. $25 FOR 12 ISSUES. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION WRITE TO: THE NEW DAWN, AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE'S CONFERENCE, GPO BOX 3126FF, MELBOURNE, 3001, AUSTRALIA. ARTICLE MAY BE REPRINTED PROVIDED THAT SOURCE IS CREDITED TOGETHER WITH FULL ADDRESS. * ALL COMMUNICATION SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS *] U.S. Plutocrats Plotted Third World Genocide by Hassan Ahmed and Joseph Brewda. Although U.S. population control studies intended for public dissemination typically centre on the allegedly dire effect that "over-population" has on the economic well-being and stability of the developing countries, this is not the actual concern of the planners who have shaped U.S. policy toward the Third World since the Henry Kissinger era in government. An examination of recently declassified documents, in particular National Security Study Memorandum 200, "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests," written in 1974, shows that U.S. government population policy is motivated by imperial and racial concerns that differ markedly from those professed publicly. The primary concern of these studies is that the continued population growth of the "less developed countries" (LDCs) would lead to an increase in the political, economic, and military power of several of these states, at the expense of the power of the Anglo-American oligarchy. The studies worry that population growth is linked to an increasing tendency for nationalization of U.S. investments, to demands for sovereign control of resources, and to the growth of anti-imperial movements generally. For that reason, the studies are devoted to developing plans to eradicate any ideas which oppose Malthusian population reduction. The documents' authors, Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft, both National Security Council directors in the relevant 1974-77 period, explicitly identify these ideas as then embodied in the call for a "New World Economic Order" The Declassified Documents On Dec. 10, 1974, the U.S. National Security Council issued a classified 250-page study entitled "National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests." The study had been prepared by the Under-secretaries Committee of the NSC under the supervision of Henry Kissinger, then serving as both secretary of state and the President's national security adviser (NSC director). The study had been ordered by President Richard Nixon in a decision directive signed on Aug. 10, 1970. This is the first known instance that a U.S. President defined Third World population increase as a threat to U.S. national security. NSSM 200, unlike other government documents on the subject, outlined the "international political and economic implications" of population growth, rather than its "ecological, sociological or other aspects." It included recommendations for "dealing with population matters abroad, particularly in the developing countries," by relevant U.S. agencies. On Oct. 16, 1975, Kissinger sent a confidential White House memorandum to then-President Gerald Ford, proposing that the President authorize an NSC decision memorandum adopting the NSC study. Following Ford's approval, the NSC issued "National Security Decision Memorandum 314" on Nov. 26, 1975, which endorsed the study and its recommendations. The memorandum was signed by Brent Scowcroft (who had, in the meantime, replaced Kissinger as national security adviser; Kissinger remained as secretary of state) and was addressed to the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, agriculture, the director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency for implementation. In May 1976, the National Security Council produced its "First Annual Report on U.S. International Population Policy," a classified report mandated by NSSM 200 and NSDM 314, which summarized the progress in implementing the earlier adopted plan of action. The report was addressed to then CIA director George Bush, among other intelligence officials, for study and implementation. Bush and Kissinger had worked together since at least 1971, when Bush had been U.S. ambassador to the U.N. and Kissinger was NSC director. During 1975, when Kissinger's memorandum was under study, Bush was the first U.S. envoy to the People's Republic of China, a major target for birth control. In 1976, Bush became the director of the CIA, where he worked closely with NSC director Scowcroft and Secretary of State Kissinger. The threesome constituted a team then, and also today. These studies were quietly declassified in 1989 and released to the U.S. National Archives in Washington in 1990, where they can now be reviewed by the public. Kissinger Fears 'backlash' NSSM 200 cites 13 "key countries" in which there is "special U.S. political and strategic interest" which requires imposing a policy of population control or reduction. The primary reason these states are so defined, is that the effect of their population growth is judged likely to increase their relative political, economic, and military regional and even world power. These key states are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia, and Colombia. The study expresses concern that even with population reduction programs put in place in such nations, "population growth rates are likely to increase appreciably before they begin to decline." So, for example: "Nigeria falls into this category. Already the most populous country on the continent, with an estimated 55 million people in 1970, Nigeria's population by the end of this century is projected to number 135 million. This suggests a growing political and strategic role for Nigeria, at least in Africa south of the Sahara." Similarly, Egypt: "The large and increasing size of Egypt's population is, and will remain for many years, an important consideration in the formulation of many foreign and domestic policies not only of Egypt but also of neighboring countries." As for Brazil, it "clearly dominated the continent demographically," the study reports. It consequently warns of a "growing power status for Brazil in Latin America and on the world scene over the next 25 years." Among Kissinger's biggest fears is that leaders of such states might realize that international population reduction programs are designed to undermine their development potential. As he puts it: "There is also the danger that some LDC leaders will see developed country pressures for family planning as a form of economic or racial imperialism; this could well create a serious backlash." He adds: "It is vital that the effort to develop and strengthen a commitment on the part of the LDC leaders not be seen by them as an industrialized country policy to keep their strength down or to reserve resources for use by 'rich' countries. Development of such a perception could create a serious backlash adverse to the cause of population stability." Ensuring Imperial Freedom of Action Another reason for fostering the population reduction of the entire Third World is frankly imperial. NSSM 200 pays particular attention to U.S. access to strategic minerals in the developing countries, and concludes that reducing the population growth of mineral-rich Third World states will make continued access to such resources more politically reliable. "The location of known reserves of higher-grade ores of most minerals favors increasing dependence of all industrialized regions on imports from less developed countries. The real problems of mineral supplies lie, not in basic physical sufficiency, but in the politico-economic issues of access, terms for exploration and exploitation, and division of the benefits among producers, consumers, and host country governments." The study forecasts that in the absence of political stability, i.e., subservience, in these states: "Concessions to foreign companies are likely to be expropriated or subjected to arbitrary intervention. Whether through governmental action, labour conflicts, sabotage, or civil disturbance, the smooth flow of needed materials will be jeopardized. Although population pressure is not the only factor involved, these types of frustrations are much less likely under conditions of slow or zero population growth." Consequently, reduction of population increases in these states is a matter of vital U.S. national security: "Whatever may be done to guard against interruptions of supply ... the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resources supplies and to the economic interests of the United States." The study is also worried that population growth in such states will tend to increase their demands for economic development. For example, in the case of Bangladesh: "Bangladesh is now a fairly solid supporter of third world positions, advocating better distribution of the world's wealth and extensive trade concessions to poor nations. As its problems grow and its ability to gain assistance fails to keep pace, Bangladesh's positions on international issues likely will become radicalized, inevitably in opposition to U.S. interests on major issues as it seeks to align itself with others to force adequate aid." No to a 'New World Economic Order' One of the major concerns of NSSM 200 is to check the spread of ideas which are hostile to population control and which demand economic development as the solution to Third World problems. According to Kissinger's definition, such ideas are a threat to U.S. national security. To highlight the dangerous growth of such ideas, the document presents the case of the World Population Conference in Bucharest in August 1974, to which "the U.S. had contributed many substantive points." The document complains that the conference's proposed World Population Plan of Action (WPPA or the Plan) was rejected by many of these states, because of the spread of such anti-Malthusian ideas. The failure of the conference, which the U.S. government had intended to be epoch-making, is one of the cited reasons for the drafting of the NSC memoranda. Referring to this conference, the document states: "There was general consternation, therefore, when at the beginning of the conference, the Plan was subjected to a slashing, five-pronged attack led by Algeria, with the backing of several African countries; Argentina, supported by Uruguay, Brazil, Peru and more limitedly, some other Latin American countries, the Eastern European group (less Romania); the P.R.C.; and the Holy See." Kissinger reports that the objections to the Plan were based on the idea that a "New World Economic Order" could be a basis for social and economic development of the former colonial sector, and also the basis for the respect for the sovereignty of these states. This would make population control appear unnecessary or even harmful, Kissinger worries. He complains about the "wishful thinking that economic development will solve the problem" generated by supposed over-population as an idea necessary to eradicate. In order to combat this "problem," the document stresses the need for "education" of Third World leaders potentially susceptible to such threatening ideas of fostering economic development: "The beliefs, ideologies, and misconceptions displayed by many nations at Bucharest indicate more forcefully than ever the need for extensive education of the leaders of many governments, especially in Africa and some in Latin America. Approaches [for] leaders of individual countries must be designed in light of their current beliefs and to meet their special concerns." Elsewhere, in NSSM 200, Kissinger defines the acceptance of the supposed need for population control as vital to the U.S. secret plan: "Development of a worldwide political and popular commitment to population stabilization is fundamental to any effective strategy. This requires the support and commitment of key LDC leaders. This will only take place if they clearly see the negative impact of unrestricted population growth and believe it is possible to deal with this question through governmental action. The U.S. should encourage LDC leaders to take the lead in advancing family planning...." To this end, the document outlines various formulations deemed appropriate in influencing such Third World leaders, and at the same time blunting the influence of those exposing the imperial policy behind population control. For example, the document reports: "The U.S. can help to minimize charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with: (a) the right of the individual to determine freely and responsibly their number and spacing of children ... and (b) the fundamental social and economic development of poor countries...." At the same time, the study recommends a worldwide propaganda offensive employing diverse U.S. governmental and international agencies to this end: "Beyond seeking to reach and influence national leaders, improved worldwide support for population-related efforts should be sought through increased emphasis on mass media and other population education and motivation programs by the U.N., USIA [U.S. Information Agency], and USAID [U.S. Agency for International Development]. We should give higher priorities in our information programs worldwide for this area and consider expansion of collaborative arrangements with multilateral institutions in population education programs." Food as a Weapon While Kissinger cautions, "We must take care that our activities should not give the appearance to the LDCs of an industrialized country policy directed against the LDCs," the document also outlines steps to force countries to adopt population reduction measures if covert forms of persuasion and education prove ineffective. The primary weapon seized upon is the restriction of food aid. The document states: "There is also some established precedent for taking account of family planning performance in appraisal of assistance requirements by AID and consultative groups. Since population growth is a major determinant of increases in food demand, allocation of scare PL 480 resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production. In these sensitive relations, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion." Elaborating on this measure, the document raises the possibility that "mandatory programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now," adding, "Would food be considered an instrument of national power? Will we be forced to make choices as to whom we can reasonably assist, and if so, should population efforts be a criterion for such assistance?|... Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can't/won't control their population growth?" Progress on Implementation As previously noted, in May 1976, the NSC released its "First Annual Report on U.S. International Population Policy," a progress-report study mandated by NSSM 200 and related memoranda. The classified study analyzed the progress made over the previous year in implementing Kissinger's memorandum, and was forwarded to then-CIA director George Bush, among other intelligence officials, for implementation. According to the report, the primary resistance to U.S. efforts to reduce the population of the former colonial sector was found in Ibero-America, the Middle East, and Africa - areas dominated or heavily influenced by either Catholicism or Islam. Both religions are opposed to birth control, a policy which the NSC condemns as "pro-natalism." The report states: "LDC countries uncommitted to population programs include most of Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East, with a combined population of about three-quarters of a billion people. Population policies of these nations range from the pro-natalism of a few to the non-commitment of most of the others, where, in varying degrees, family planning is tolerated or even encouraged. Abortion is generally abhorred, and sterilization disfavored." The report complains that this "relative lack of concern," which required being combated, can be "explained by a variety of factors," including: 1) no perceived need to limit population growth; 2) or, if there is a perceived need, wishful thinking that economic development will solve the problem; 3) belief that a large family is necessary for old age security or to meet needs for labour at certain points of farming cycle; 4) preoccupation with other, more immediate issues; 5) religious influences; and 6) ignorance as well as racialism, tribalism, and traditionalism." The report adds: "To the extent family planning is identified with the Western world, particularly the United States, there are even greater inhibitions in some countries toward family planning. This factor may be particularly noticeable in international conferences where Third World countries tend to combine against the West, against capitalism, and in favor of the 'New World Economic Order.'" Then, in typical Washingtonese, the report outlines a program of subversion: "It follows that our efforts to promote family planning amongst uncommitted countries must be fine-tuned to the particular sensitivities in each of these countries. This serves to underline the important role of our Ambassador and his or her country team in each LDC in terms of advising Washington on how commitment can be best achieved in terms of the particular circumstances of that country being alert to take timely initiatives on their own to further these objectives." The Need for 'Police-State Discipline' In contrast to the "uncommitted" countries, which are subject to special covert targeting, the progress-report cites countries allegedly committed to, or at least not opposed to birth control. These countries include most of Asia, notably the People's Republic of China. The study claims that "almost one-half of the world's population live in developing countries whose leaders are committed to population policies and programs. This represents roughly two-thirds of the developing world." This account contrasts with statements made in the 1974 Kissinger memorandum, in which hostility toward population control by such states was considered far more prevalent. However, the study notes that even in these nations, population reduction is often difficult to implement without an appropriate form of government, even if public education, dispension of birth control devices, and other measures are vigorously pursued: "Many leaders recognize that all these measures, significant as they are, will not help reduce population growth rates sufficiently to avert major disasters. Prerequisites for real success are likely to involve three approaches that are interrelated and have proved highly effective, as follows: 1) strong direction from the top; 2) developing community or 'peer' pressures from below; and 3) providing adequate low-cost health-family planning services that get to the people. With regard to 1), population programs have been particularly successful where leaders have made their positions clear, unequivocal, and public, while maintaining discipline down the line from national to village levels, marshalling government workers (including police and military), doctors, and motivators to see that population policies are well administered and executed. Such direction is the {sine qua non} of an effective program. In some cases, strong direction has involved incentives such as payment to acceptors for sterilizations, or disincentives such as giving low priorities in the allocation of housing and schooling to larger families." Thus it can be said that in 1976, the U.S. government was committed to an imperial policy which had the following components: a plan to enfeeble the power of the developing sector through fostering population decline; a plan to undermine states opposed to population control; a plan to create or strengthen Third World police-states as a means of enforcing population control. A central principle of this policy was the idea that Third World economic development represents a threat to U.S. national security, and that those advocating such development policies had to be crushed.